Glengarry Glen Ross: A Play

Dedicated to Harold Pinter, Mamet's masterpiece is certainly the American version of the Britsh master's theater of malice. But where everything is innuendo in Pinter, in Mamet, it's exuberant and hammer-fisted. The play does not include the classic "always be closing" scene which gave Alec Baldwin his very best role in the movie version. And the movie took a few halting steps toward trying to make the two leading characters a bit more sympathetic. Nonetheless, this play is just this side of perfect in its ability to induce groans and guffaws in equal measure. And, in its own very dark way, it's a deeply spiritual experience as well.

They turned this play into a movie some years back, and the cast usually referred to it as "Death of a F****** Salesman." A good pairing could be made between this and Miller's play, if it weren't for the fact that teaching this play in high school would probably raise some eyebrows. If Mamet is famous for one thing, it's his ability to put spoken language on a page. Reading one of his plays out loud is quite possibly a one of a kind experience, as even the best playwrights don't seem to have the ear that he does when it comes to the way people actually talk. His characters say in five words what many characters could only say in five lines.

Glengarry Glen Ross is a play by David Mamet that has won accolades across the board, been featured in the National Theatre of London, been on Broadway, and made into a movie (starring Al Pacino, Alec Baldwin, Jack Lemmon, Alan Arkin, Ed Harris, Kevin Spacey - I mean holy heavens Batman that is some serious casting).

The action takes place over two days in two settings: a Chinese restaurant and a real estate office. The characters are real estate agents from Chicago trying to sell swampland in Florida to unwilling buyers, and they will lie, cheat, bribe, and in general be insufferable to do so. Their immorality doesn't stop with schmoozing average joes; they are also ridiculous to each other and willing to do just about anything, show more including steal, to make a buck. In other words, they are terrible people.

I am entirely unsure how I feel about this play. I picked it up from the library on a whim. I was just walking around finding where things were (my first time in this particular library) and the title jumped out at me, being as it was familiar. I brought it home and read it during a blackout. I just love it when we lose electricity; that is some serious guilt free reading time in my opinion.

I think my main problem with the play was the language. No one finished their freaking sentences. Like ever. I can see swindly egocentric men getting a bit phrase-ish when they get excited, but trying to read a play where every single character has difficulty forming a complete thought is taxing. I wonder if the film version is better; there's no way they made the movie true to the play as far as dialogue and action. Otherwise the movie would be extremely short and dull; after all, the entire play is conversations. With that cast of actors, it shouldn't be too difficult a movie to watch.

As for what I did like about the play, first and foremost, it was interesting to watch listen to read about such horrible people. They were such over the top stereotypes of swindlers and listening to them complain and scheme was a bit entertaining. Overall, I can't give a solid recommendation. I'm glad I read it, but I definitely won't be reading it again. show less

Unreadable, and I mean that as a compliment. This is absolutely a playscript; it comes alive on the stage. On the page it is unreadable.

Read it *after* you see a production.

Desperate real estate sales men go to any length to make a sale and earn a buck. I feel almost like this could have been a prequel to "Death of a Salesman." The dialogue is sharp and funny. It's a quick read, which I'm sure would be enhanced by seeing the film or seeing it on stage.

Glengarry Glen Ross: A Play listened to the script read by a single narrator (non-Dramatized). It won a Pulitzer many consider it important, probably would be better seen on stage with actors. Foul-mouthed real-estate salesmen recount becoming "like family" with customers, while revealing the salesmen true ugly selves back at the office. Based on Mamet's own experiences. Sort of a Kitchen Confidential but less appetizing. It seems dated even for 1984, these are 1950s and 60s concerns about masculinity and the soullessness of modernity. Then again it is sort of timeless.

I never liked Mamet. No appeal whatsoever. And these guys, ugh.
A good actor can create meaning and depth and emotion and nuance, none of which are clear to me when I am just reading the script (which failing explains two different acting schools not inviting me to return). The movie was quite good.
But a brilliant cast would still be doing Mamet, and no part of that would be enjoyable for me. I prefer stories in which women are half the world's population and in which they count as people. A preference which becomes more firm as I age toward crone.
Your mileage will certainly vary.

Library copy